Camden LINK: ‘Treatment ban will hit poor who can’t go private’

Published: 17 June 2010
by TOM FOOT

TOUGH new criteria barring NHS patients from treatment for “low priority” ailments will hit the poor, Camden’s NHS watchdog has warned.

Chairman of Camden LINK Neil Woodnick has signalled his opposition to a policy limiting 25 selected treatments and procedures to “special cases”. Mr Woodnick said restricting treatments – including dental implants and minor oral surgery – will affect patients who cannot afford to go private.

He said: “It is ironical at a time when PCTs [primary care trusts] are striving to achieve equality in access to healthcare, especially in the most deprived wards, that a policy is introduced that will fall mainly on those residents who currently live in the most poverty.”

The cuts to 25 treatments are expected to save NHS bosses £6million a year – but the scale of the restrictions could rise.

Dr Steve Amiel, a partner at Caversham Practice in Kentish Town, said: “Clearly, this is a cost-saving exercise. I’m sure the number of these treatments will gradually be increased. The idea disadvantaged patients should be further disadvantaged is regrettable.”

The policy decision was taken in February behind closed doors at the headquarters of the North Central London (NCL) sector trust in Islington.

NCL – a consortium of five north London health authorities – does not meet publicly or produce board papers.

Dr Amiel said: “For all talk about devolving power to the frontline, most commissioning decisions have been taken out of the hands of individual PCTs and put in the hands of NCL. The PCTs, let alone the professionals that advise them, have little or no input. For all the talk about the public being involved in public sector cuts, it is all going on behind the scenes.”

He added: “It is quite likely that in the next year or two we will see the disappearance of all PCTs.”

A NHS Camden spokeswoman said: “Con­sultation on the implementation of the policy is being undertaken at local level by PCTs. 

“In Camden, the implementation of the policy will not result in a significant change for most of the treatments listed in the policy. Receipt of these treatments has long been regulated through the application of ‘service access criteria’ which use similar clinical thresholds to those proposed by the [new] policy.”

Solicitor Richard Stein questioned wheth­er the consultation was legal. “Consultation must be carried out when the proposal is at a formative stage so it can influence the outcome – not after the decision has been taken,” he said. “From what I understand the new policy is unlawful and if it was challenged would be struck down by the courts.”